Colin Mitchel, Robert Mitchel, in his own right and as assignee of the estate and effects of the mercantile house formerly trading under the firm of Carnochan and Mitchel, along with Richard Ca were involved in a case that went before the US Supreme Court. The dispute was over whether or not Colin had authority to act on behalf of himself and other creditors when he sold certain assets belonging to Carnochan & Mitchell. The court ultimately ruled that Colin did have such authority because he was acting within his capacity as an assignee for all parties involved. Furthermore, they found that Richard Ca's rights were adequately protected by this decision since it ensured that any proceeds from asset sales would be distributed fairly among all creditors according to their respective claims against Carnochan & Mitchell.

In the dissenting opinion of this US Supreme Court case, Chief Justice Taney argued that the court should not have heard the appeal because it did not meet certain criteria. He stated that a party must be able to show an injury or wrong done to them in order for their case to be heard by the court and Colin Mitchel had failed to do so. Furthermore, he argued that even if there was an injury suffered by Mitchel, his claim would still fail as he could only bring suit against Carnochan & Mitchel - which no longer existed due to bankruptcy proceedings - and not Richard Ca who was now solely responsible for any debts owed. As such, Taney concluded that since there were no legal grounds on which they could hear this case, it should have been dismissed from consideration altogether.